L'OIT est une institution spécialisée des Nations-Unies
ILO-fr-strap
Plan du site | Contact English
> Page d'accueil > Triblex: base de données sur la jurisprudence > Par mots-clés du thésaurus > ordonnance

Jugement n° 4029

Décision

1. La décision du Directeur général du 20 novembre 2015 et la décision du Département des ressources humaines du 5 février 2013 sont annulées.
2. L'OMS versera au requérant des dommages-intérêts pour tort matériel comme prévu au considérant 21 du jugement.
3. L'OMS versera au requérant la somme de 1 000 francs suisses au titre des dépens.
4. Toutes les autres conclusions sont rejetées.

Synthèse

Le requérant conteste la décision de ne pas lui octroyer l'avancement de deux échelons que, selon lui, l'OMS aurait dû lui octroyer au moment de son engagement au titre d'un contrat de durée déterminée.

Mots-clés du jugement

Mots-clés

Echelon

Considérant 19

Extrait:

It is well settled in the case law “that a practice cannot become legally binding if it contravenes a written rule that is already in force” (Judgment 3601, under 10). In Judgment 2959, under 7, the Tribunal explained that “a practice which is in violation of a rule cannot have the effect of modifying the rule itself”. In this case, WHO initiated a practice for the benefit of long-term short-term staff members to address the concern that these staff members were not given any within-grade increases. The benefit provided in the application of that practice went beyond and was in addition to the provisions in Staff Rule 320.1. The practice did not modify Staff Rule 320.1 or affect the rights of other WHO staff members. Accordingly, the Tribunal concludes that the practice was legally binding.

Référence(s)

Jugement(s) TAOIT: 2959, 3601

Mots-clés

Pratique

Considérant 20

Extrait:

[T]he principle of equality requires that persons in the same position in fact and in law must be treated equally. The failure to grant the complainant the two-step within-grade increase that at the material time was given to other long-term short-term staff members, who were in the same position as the complainant, constitutes unequal treatment and entitles the complainant to an award of material damages.

Mots-clés

Egalité de traitement

Considérant 22

Extrait:

The complainant’s request for an order requiring WHO to provide him with a Certificate of Service is beyond the Tribunal’s competence. However, it is noted that WHO has agreed to provide the complainant with a Certificate of Service upon request.

Mots-clés

Compétence du Tribunal; Ordonnance; Certificat de service



 
Dernière mise à jour: 03.12.2018 ^ haut